Passive louver-based daylighting system

ABSTRACT

A daylighting system for use in a building including a louver array having a first longitudinal element, and a second longitudinal element spaced therefrom. At least one of the first and second elements has an asymmetrical profile, each of the first and second longitudinal elements has a bottom profile including a parabolic surface, portions of opposing surfaces of the first and second longitudinal elements define a compound parabolic concentrator profile having a non-horizontal centerline that is tilted upwards, and the array prevents line of sight therethrough. A louver for a daylighting system includes (i) a leading edge defined by a leading connecting surface disposal between a parabolic concentrator surface and a flat surface; and (ii) a trailing edge defined by a trailing connecting surface disposed between a lower compound parabolic concentrator profile, and an upper compound parabolic concentrator profile. A method for designing a louver profile is provided.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

This application claims priority to and the benefit of U.S. applicationSer. No. 13/222,533 filed on Aug. 31, 2011, which claims priority to andthe benefit of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/413,804 filed onNov. 15, 2010, both applications are hereby incorporated herein byreference in their entireties.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The invention relates generally to window treatment systems andparticularly to daylighting systems.

BACKGROUND

Daylighting systems are used to provide natural light to buildingspaces, reducing the need for electric lighting. Effective use ofdaylight has several positive benefits including lower energy bills,lower fossil fuel consumption for electricity generation, and increasedwork environment satisfaction for occupants. An overview of manyexisting daylighting systems can be found in Ruck et al., Daylight inBuildings: A Source Book on Daylighting Systems and Components, a reportof the International Energy Agency SHC Task 21/ECBCS Annex 29 (July2000) and incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.

Anidolic Systems

The search for a static daylighting system that redirects light deeplyand also prevents direct sunlight from entering the room at a downwardsangle led to the science of non-imaging optics and a technology calledthe compound parabolic concentrator (CPC). The field of non-imaging, oranidolic, optics was initially used in the development of solarcollectors (Scartezzini and Courret, “Anidolic Daylighting Systems,”Scartezzini, J.-L. & Courret, G., 2002. Anidolic Daylighting Systems.Solar Energy, 73(2), pp. 123-35.), incorporated herein by reference inits entirety.

The CPC was originally used as a solar concentrator that accepts alllight rays from a defined angular extent and concentrates them on asmaller area. The CPC, when used for daylighting applications, uses thesame type of reflector profile, but light moves through the profile inthe opposite direction. Referring to FIG. 1, based on a figure of a sideview of a zenithal anidolic collector from Scartezzini, light entersfrom all directions through a small inlet aperture and is aligned into acontrolled angular range at the outlet. See Scartezzini, Jean-louis,“Anidolic Systems—Non-imaging Transmission of Daylight into Darker Partsof Buildings,” EPFL Solar Energy and Building Physics LaboratoryLESO-PB/Web 17 Aug. 2010, incorporated herein by reference in itsentirety.

A complete discussion of how the CPC works can be found in Winston,Roland, Juan C. Miñano, Pablo Benitez, and W. T. Welford. NonimagingOptics. Amsterdam: Elsevier Academic, (2005), pages 50 though 57,incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. There are fourparameters that define the CPC's geometry: inlet size, outlet size,length, and maximum output angle. Setting any two of these parameterswill determine the other two and completely define the geometry of theCPC.

Existing anidolic systems, such as the zenithal anidolic collector, werefound to have several major shortcomings when applied to an officebuilding setting. For example, since the zenithal anidolic collectorallows specular descending rays, the system typically needs to be shadedunder sunny conditions to protect from glare. In an open-plan office,blinds that are shut to control glare often remain shut for long periodsof time. This problem may only be fully overcome by automating theshading system to eliminate the need for adjustments by the occupants.The physical dimensions of the zenithal anidolic collector are alsoquite large, approximately 1 to 2 m long and 0.5 to 1 m tall. This sizereduces the ceiling height near the facade and makes using the spaceunderneath awkward. Integrating the exterior light scoop can also be anarchitectural challenge.

Louver Systems

Reflective louvers form another relevant group of daylighting systems.Louver systems are often designed to be located between two panes ofglass, making the task of integration into the facade much easier thanwith larger systems such as the zenithal anidolic collector.Conceptually, louver systems generally consist of a vertical array ofidentically-shaped curved slats, with a profile that redirects daylightonto the ceiling. The Fish system (U.S. Pat. No. 4,699,467, incorporatedherein by reference in its entirety, and also illustrated in Ruck, page4-24), shown in FIG. 2, is one such louver system. Although it is ableto redirect all incoming light above horizontal, it does a relativelypoor job of collimating the output light. As a result, light from theselouvers may not penetrate as deeply as desired.

Compagnon evaluated a reflector system comprised of anidolic profiles,as shown in FIG. 3. See p. 138, FIG. 5.47 of Compagnon, R., SimulationsNumeriques de Systemes D'Eclairage Naturel a Penetration Laterale. PhDThesis. Lausanne: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, 1994,incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. The inner anidoliccurves are tilted upwards so that light exiting the reflectors may bedirected onto the ceiling, to protect from glare. The idea of usinganidolic profiles to compose a louver array is an attractive one.However, in this configuration the design of the outer half of thelouver results in the rejection of all light above a projected elevationangle of 60°. Light enters the room at a maximum of 60° abovehorizontal, which is a lower maximum elevation angle than that of theFish Louver. However, the output elevation range is still fairly wideand the amount of light traveling deeply into the space may be limitedas a result. The lower curve of the CPC profile is truncated in thisdesign, meaning that the louvers will spill light below horizontal,potentially causing glare. Also, although it is more compact than thezenithal anidolic collector, the size of the assembly is still ratherbulky at 0.48 m depth.

Referring to FIGS. 4 a and 4 b, the CPC was incorporated into anotherlouver system developed by Eames and Norton (Eames, P. & Norton, B.,1994. A Window Blind Reflector System for the Deeper Penetration ofDaylight into Room Without Glare. International Journal of AmbientEnergy, 15(2), pp. 73-77, incorporated herein by reference in itsentirety. As with Compagnon's design, light enters the louver arraythrough a skyward tilted CPC, and is guided therethrough as shown inFIGS. 4 a and 4 b, i.e., FIGS. 1 & 2 of Eames et al., which include agraph of ray tracing through the profile. However, Eames and Norton'sdesign has an asymmetric anidolic louver profile, in which the innerhalf of the louver is composed of a flat section and a circular section,rather than another CPC.

These inner surfaces of the Eames and Norton design may raise severalissues that may make this design problematic. For example, the louversare spaced such that sunlight can pass directly through without beingredirected. Also, light is able to reflect off the outer CPC and enterthe room at a downward angle. Both of these effects have the potentialto cause glare under direct sunlight. The output elevation angle rangesup to 90°, which means that a large portion of the light hits theceiling immediately adjacent to the facade without travelling very farinto the space. The inner flat surface of this louver is diffuse, solight hitting it may be scattered in all directions, further limitingthe louver's ability to guide light to the back of the space. Finally,the CPC inlet section rejects light with an elevation angle above 65°,for light normal to the facade in azimuth. As the azimuth angle of thelight increases, this cut-off angle drops from 65° down to 0°, for lightnearly parallel to the facade. As a result, the system is not able totransmit light from a large portion of the sky. The lower portion of thesky from which the system does successfully pass light is also the firstto be blocked by surrounding sky obstructions. Additional attempts weremade to incorporate anidolic geometry into a louver array, as shown inFIG. 5, which illustrates additional anidolic louver designs. See FIG. 3on page 3 of Courret, G., Paule, B. & Scartezzini, J.-L., 1994.Application de l'Optique Anidolique a l'Eclairage Naturel Lateral d'unNouveau Baitment. In Wärmeschutz Conference. Zurich, 1994, incorporatedherein by reference in its entirety.

These designs have some intriguing features but, ultimately, may not besuitable for a deep-plan space. The first two images show the samedesign at different scales. These louvers collimate light into a verynarrow range around horizontal, but since the anidolic curves are nottiled towards the ceiling, approximately half of the light will exitbelow horizontal. This may be acceptable for a shallow office with adepth 3 or 4 m, but it would likely cause disturbing glare in deeperspaces. Another drawback with this design is that a large fraction ofthe incoming light is rejected by the steeply inclined plane at thelouver's inlet. Finally, the very long and slender shape of the louvermay be difficult to produce accurately, especially at the scalecontemplated in the middle image. The intent of the rightmost system inthe image is to reject high-angle light while admitting low-angle light.This design allows light to exit at a downward angle as well, meaningthat all the variants shown in FIG. 5 would likely require an additionalshading system if exposed to direct sun.

Referring to FIG. 6, another, more recent, entry into the reflectivelouver category which does not incorporate a CPC profile is called theLightLouver (U.S. Pat. No. 6,714,352, incorporated herein by referencein its entirety). See also “Information.” LightLouver Daylighting SystemHomepage. LightLouver LLC. Web. 18 Aug. 2010, incorporated herein byreference in its entirety. This louver is able to collimate the outputlight closer to horizontal so that light generally penetrates moredeeply than with the other systems discussed. However, there are severaldownsides worth noting. First, the LightLouver system allows lowelevation angle sunlight (5° or less) to enter the room at a downwardangle. This may or may not be a problem depending on the circumstance ofa particular installation site. Second, the entire exterior-facingsurface of the louver is a diffusing surface, which rejects a largefraction of the total incoming daylight, leaving less to distribute intothe room. This exemplifies a recurring trade off seen in louver systemsbetween the amount of light rejected by the louver and the extent of theemitted light's angular range. Finally, the width-to-height ratio of theLightLouver is rather large at 2.75 (Rogers et al., 2004). More louverswould be required to fill an equivalent window opening than with adesign with a smaller aspect ratio.

Static and Dynamic Systems

In general, daylighting systems may be divided into two categories:passive and dynamic. Passive systems are fixed and contain no movingparts. Dynamic systems contain moving parts, which are usually used totrack the sun as it moves across the sky.

Since they have no moving parts, passive systems are generally lessexpensive and require less maintenance than dynamic systems. However,passive systems are typically only effective for a limited range of sunand sky conditions. Moreover, they may at times, allow direct sun topass through unimpeded, causing glare. As a result, a separate shadingsystem is typically required, which may lead to additional problemsresulting from suboptimal control of the shading system.

Dynamic systems are typically used to respond to the dynamic nature ofthe sun. A common example is the venetian blind, whose slats can beadjusted, manually or automatically, in response to different insolationconditions. When automated, these systems are typically more expensivein both upfront and maintenance costs than their passive counterpartsbecause they require rotating machinery, an accurate control system, andhuman monitoring. Another limitation is that since most dynamic systemsare designed to use the sun's radiation as input, their effectiveness isseverely reduced under overcast conditions. In cloudy climates, it maybe difficult to justify the additional expense of a sun-tracking dynamicsystem.

SUMMARY

A new louver system, incorporating, inter alia, a CPC profile, improvesupon or eliminates the drawbacks of both the anidolic and louver systemsdescribed above.

Embodiments of the daylighting system of the invention are suitable forbuildings with deep open-plan spaces, commonly found in officebuildings. The daylighting system takes both direct sunlight and diffuseskylight and directs it into the room at an angle near horizontal, whichallows the light to penetrate deeply. The system is designed to diffusedirect sunlight to reduce glare.

The compact design, including features that prevent direct sunpenetration, of the described system provide advantages over existingsystems. For example, the LightLouver discussed above has a largerwidth-to-height ratio than the louver described herein (typically 2.75,in contrast to 2.32 in one preferred embodiment of the invention).Consequently, for a given glazing unit width and height, approximately19% more individual LightLouvers would be required to fill the space, incomparison to the louver of embodiments of the invention. In addition,the LightLouver allows direct sun penetration at low elevation anglesbetween 0-5°, a potential source of glare. In various embodiments, thenew louver does not allow undiffused direct sun penetration in adownward direction for any angle of incoming light.

The system, in accordance with embodiments of the invention, has thepotential to bridge the gap between automated systems that are expensiveand maintenance-intensive and passive systems that can be ineffectiveand/or cause glare for significant parts of the year. The system issimple, passive, and maintenance free. It is also well suited for bothsunny and cloudy conditions without requiring any reconfiguration.

The daylighting system described herein may be used in any buildingspace with a facade that faces east, south, or west. (or, in thesouthern hemisphere, the north, east, or west). The daylighting systemis suitable for office buildings, since office buildings are typicallyoccupied during daylit hours and often have deep-plan layouts, for whichthe system is designed. For spaces which are not as deep, the length ofthe reflective ceiling may be reduced or eliminated to minimize cost.The system can be installed in new buildings and as a retrofit toexisting buildings. For organizations that are interested in owning oroccupying green buildings, the daylighting system is an attractiveoption.

In an aspect, an embodiment of the invention includes a daylightingsystem for use in a building including a louver array having a firstlongitudinal element, and a second longitudinal element spacedtherefrom. At least one of the first and second elements has anasymmetrical profile, each of the first and second longitudinal elementshas a bottom profile including a parabolic surface, portions of opposingsurfaces of the first and second longitudinal elements define a compoundparabolic concentrator profile, a centerline of the compound parabolicconcentrator profile is non-horizontal and is tilted upwards, and thearray prevents line of sight therethrough.

One or more of the following features may be included. The first elementmay have a generally triangular profile. The triangular profile mayinclude a leading edge, a trailing edge, and an apex therebetween. Theapex may be disposed in a downward direction from the leading andtrailing edges. An upper surface formed between the leading edge and thetrailing edge may have a discontinuous contour, such as a pair ofarcuate surfaces meeting at a boundary line. An inlet surface formedbetween the leading edge and the apex may include a planar surface. Anoutlet surface formed between the apex and the trailing edge may includean arcuate surface. At least a portion of the first element may includea partially specular reflective surface.

A channel formed between the first louver element and the second louverelement may include an entry aperture, inlet aperture, a throat, and anexit aperture. The entry aperture may span respective leading edges ofthe first element and the second element. The inlet aperture may span anapex of the first element and an upper surface of the second element.

The exit aperture may span respective trailing edges of the firstelement and the second element. A half-width of the exit aperture may beequal to a half-width of the inlet aperture divided by sine θ_(max),with θ_(max)=a maximum output angle of the channel. A boundary line maybe disposed downstream of the throat.

The first element and the second element may have a common profileand/or may be vertically aligned. Output elevation angles of a majorityof light rays exiting the daylighting system may be selected from arange of 0° to 2×θ_(max). with θ_(max)=a maximum output angle of achannel formed between the first longitudinal element and the secondlongitudinal element. A minimum reflectance of at least one of the firstand second longitudinal elements may be 50% luminous reflectivity.

The daylighting system may include a first glazing, with the first andsecond elements being disposed proximate the first glazing. Thedaylighting system may also include a second glazing, with the first andsecond elements being disposed between the first glazing and the secondglazing.

A refractive element may be disposed proximate the first and secondlongitudinal elements and between the first glazing and the secondglazing. The refractive element may include or consist of a plurality ofrefractive rods.

A reflective ceiling may be disposed proximate the first and secondlongitudinal elements. The reflective ceiling may have a minimumreflectance of at least 50% luminous reflectivity.

In another aspect, embodiments of the invention include a louver for adaylighting system. The louver includes a leading edge defined by aparabolic concentrator surface, a flat surface, and a leading connectingsurface disposed between the parabolic concentrator surface and the flatsurface. The louver also includes a trailing edge defined by a lowercompound parabolic concentrator profile, an upper compound parabolicconcentrator profile, and a trailing connecting surface disposed betweenthe lower compound parabolic concentrator profile and the upper compoundparabolic concentrator profile.

In yet another aspect, embodiments of the invention include a method fordesigning a louver profile. The method includes creating a compoundparabolic concentrator profile, having (i) a lower profile equal to anegative of an upper profile, and (ii) ends of the lower and upperprofiles defining a large aperture and a small aperture, the largeaperture being disposed downstream of the small aperture. The compoundparabolic concentrator profile is rotated counterclockwise by a maximumoutput angle θ_(max). A parabola with a vertical axis of symmetry isadded using an upstream end of the upper profile as a focus and anupstream end of the lower profile as a point on the parabola. The upperprofile is moved vertically downwards below the lower profile to form asmall gap between downstream edges of the upper and lower profiles. Aline connecting the downstream ends of the upper and lower profiles isadded to define a trailing edge. A line starting from an upstream end ofthe lowered upper profile is added, with the line ending at theparabola.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF FIGURES

FIG. 1 is a side view of a zenithal anidolic collector system of theprior art;

FIG. 2 is a diagram of a Fish louver cross section of the prior art;

FIG. 3 is a diagram of anodolic louvers of the prior art;

FIGS. 4 a and 4 b are diagrams of an asymmetric anadolic louver profileof the prior art, and ray tracing through the profile;

FIG. 5 is a diagram of additional anidolic louver designs of the priorart;

FIG. 6 is a diagram of a LightLouver cross section of the prior art, asillustrated in U.S. Pat. No. 6,714,352;

FIG. 7 is a schematic diagram of an entire daylighting system inaccordance with an embodiment of the invention;

FIGS. 8 and 9 are illustrations of the system disposed in an officespace equipped with one embodiment of the invention;

FIGS. 10 and 11 are cross-sectional diagrams illustrating window unitsformed in accordance with embodiments of the invention;

FIG. 12 is a schematic diagram illustrating features of a louver pair inaccordance with an embodiment of the invention;

FIG. 13 is a schematic diagram illustrating the definition of theelevation angle;

FIGS. 14 a-14 j illustrates ray tracing through louvers for varyingincoming elevation angles;

FIG. 15 illustrates the definition of the coordinate system;

FIG. 16 illustrates the major dimensions of an embodiment of theinvention;

FIGS. 17 a-23 are graphical representations illustrating a method fordesigning a louver profile in accordance with an embodiment of theinvention;

FIG. 24 a-24 b are graphs illustrating ray tracing through rods for twodifferent azimuth angles;

FIG. 25 is a graph illustrating workplane illuminance for differentreflective ceiling lengths;

FIGS. 26 a-26 d are graphs illustrating workplane illuminance forselected time steps along the centerline of the room for the system andbase cases.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Referring to FIGS. 7-9, an embodiment of the daylighting system 10 ofthe invention includes three major subassemblies. Two of thesesubassemblies, the reflective louvers and refractive rods, discussed indetail below, are housed in a window unit 12 installed at the top of thedaylit facade 13. The other subassembly includes a reflective ceiling14. The reflective ceiling 14 may be achieved with reflective panelsthat cover the ceiling from the daylit facade 13 to a distance of 4 to 6m inboard (the distance required will vary based on room size andperformance goals). More specifically, FIG. 7 is a cross-sectionaldiagram of a proposed daylighting system 10 installed in an office.FIGS. 8 and 9 are renderings of the system 10 from inside the officespace.

FIGS. 10 and 11 are side view cross-section and top view cross-section,respectively, of the window unit 12, in accordance with an embodiment ofthe invention. The window unit 12 contains two glass panes 16, similarto a standard double glazed window unit. The glass panes 16 include afirst or outer glazing 18 and a second or inner glazing 20. Disposedbetween the outer and inner glass panes 16 is an optical deviceincluding reflective longitudinal elements 22, also referred to hereinas louvers 22, and refractive rods 24, as discussed below. Both thelouvers 22 and refractive rods 24 are sensitive to dust and scratching.Placing them inside the window unit 12 helps provide protection andeliminates or reduces maintenance.

To protect occupants from glare, there is no view through the windowunit 12 to the outdoors. The bottom of the unit 12 is preferably nolower than approximately 2.1 m off the floor to allow for a view windowon the lower portion of the facade 13.

Louver Design

The functionality of the louver 22 in accordance with embodiments of theinvention shall now be described. To understand how the louver systemworks, it helps to consider the geometry of a channel 26 that is createdbetween first and second longitudinal elements, i.e., two louvers 22.Four surfaces A, B, C, and D of a first and a second louver 22 definethis channel 26, as shown in FIG. 12. Taken together, surfaces A, C, andD form a louver profile 28 or cross-section of a longitudinal elementsimilar to the zenithal anidolic collector daylighting system. Asdepicted in FIG. 12, the louver profile 28 is asymmetric. In someembodiments, the profile 28 is constant along a longitudinal directionor extant of the louver 22.

The profile 28 described here is the ideal shape, with the profile 28coming to a sharp point at either end (i.e., at leading and trailingedges). As depicted, the profile 28 of the louver 22 includes a leadingedge (point H), a trailing edge (point I), and an apex (point E). Insome preferred embodiments, in view of manufacturing capabilities, theprofile 28 does not include a sharp end at the leading edge and/or thetrailing edge; rather the profile 28 may have leading and trailingconnecting surfaces at these locations, with a larger minimum thickness.For example, a leading connecting surface may connect Surface A andSurface B at point H, and a trailing connecting surface may connectSurface C and Surface D at point I.

Surface A

Surface A is a parabolic reflector or parabolic concentrator surface,whose purpose is to collect incident light that passes through an entryaperture 29 and ensure that the light is bounced through a small inletaperture 30. The nature of the parabolic profile ensures that any lightray that strikes the parabola with an elevation angle α less than orequal to 90° will successfully pass through the inlet aperture 30. Inother words, the ray is preferably moving toward, rather than away from,a louver exit aperture 31 when it hits surface A to successfully passthrough the channel 26. FIG. 13 shows the definition of the elevationangle α and an example of a ray with an elevation angle α of 90°, afterit reflects off of surface B, and just makes it through the inletaperture 30. As depicted in FIG. 12, this effect occurs because thevertex of the parabola (point F) is located directly underneath thefocus (point E) at the proper distance so that the curve of the parabolaintersects the end of surface D (point G). Point E may be referred to asan apex. A region between the entry aperture 29 and the inlet aperture30 may be referred to as a throat 32. A boundary line is located atpoint G and extends along a longitudinal direction of the louver 22. Thelongitudinal direction is normal or perpendicular to the louver profile28 depicted in FIG. 12. Surfaces A and D, taken together, form adiscontinuous contour, with a pair of arcuate surfaces meeting at theboundary line.

This design differs from that of a standard zenithal anidolic collectorsystem. With the zenithal anidolic collector, the CPC (surfaces C and D)is not tilted upwards as it is in this louver design. A result of thisis that for the zenithal anidolic collector, the end of surface D wouldbe located directly underneath the end of surface C. For the zenithalanidolic collector, the vertex of the parabolic light scoop (surface A)is simply located at point F, and the resulting profile for surface A isexactly half of a full parabola. However, in the case of the louver 22,the end of surface D (point G) does not fall directly underneath the endof surface C (point E). In a preferred embodiment, the vertex of surfaceA (point F) is kept directly underneath the end of surface C (point E).The parabolic profile of surface A is defined so that its focus islocated at the end of surface C (point E) and so that it also intersectsthe end of surface D (point G). This choice of profile increases thedistance from the parabola's vertex to focus, which reduces how steeplythe parabola curves upwards. This is important because the steeper thecurve of the parabola, the more low angle light is rejected sincesurface B then needs to be tilted at a steeper angle to intersect withthe steeper parabola.

Surface B

Surface B is the simplest of the four louver surfaces, as it is planarrather than curved. Conceptually, its purpose is analogous to that ofthe backboard of a basketball goal. Incoming light that bounces offsurface B is redirected toward surface A. As long as the reflected rayleaves surface A at an elevation angle α less than or equal to 90°, itwill strike the parabola of surface A and enter the inlet aperture 30(refer to FIG. 13 for an example of such a ray). Without surfaces A andB, only a fraction of the light hitting the facade 13 may enter theinlet aperture 30, as the rest may be lost in the interstitial spacesbetween inlet apertures.

As mentioned above, the angle of surface B controls how efficiently lowangle light is allowed to pass through the louvers 22. Ideally, theangle of surface B with respect to horizontal is 45° so that horizontallight is reflected off surface B directly downwards onto surface A. Inthat case, any incoming light with an elevation angle α of 0° or greatersuccessfully passes into the inlet aperture 30.

Preferably, the angle of surface B is as close to 45° as possible toincrease the amount of low angle light that successfully passes throughthe louver channel 26. Surface B needs to connect with the parabola ofsurface A to complete the louver profile 28. At 45°, however, surface Bmay not intersect surface A. At a theoretical minimum angle, surface Bis tangent to surface A. If a louver 22 is defined with the angle ofsurface B being equal to the theoretical minimum angle, the leading edgemay be excessively long and thin, thereby possibly becoming too fragile,and, more importantly, increasing a width to height ratio of the louver22 to an extent which may be difficult to house in a glazing unit.Moreover, this increase in size may not provide significant benefits interms of passing of low angle light. Therefore, the angle of surface Bis preferably greater than the theoretically minimum angle. In anembodiment, the theoretical minimum angle may be 55°, and the selectedangle of surface B may be 58°.

In the embodiment of the louver design described here, the angle ofsurface B with respect to horizontal was chosen to be 58°, rather than45°. This increase in angle allows surfaces A and B of the same louverto intersect at point H. As a result, the majority of light raysincoming at less than approximately 26° (=2 times the difference between58° and) 45°, referred to as the cut-off angle, are rejected by theouter half of the louver 22.

With this type of louver design, there is a direct correlation betweenthe allowable range of output angles and the cut-off angle. The tighterthe output light's angular range, the higher is the cut-off angle. Foran urban setting, the impact of losing light from near the horizon isless significant than it otherwise may be because the urban surroundingsoften block the view to the bottom portion of the sky. For light raysthat are not perpendicular to the facade 13, the projected elevationangle is increased, meaning that a significant portion of light comingin at less than a 26° angle also passes through the louvers 22successfully.

Surfaces C and D

The profiles of surfaces C and D are governed by the equations found onpage 51 of the book Nonimaging Optics. In an embodiment, the maximumoutput angle for the chosen design was 20°. This means that all lightexiting the louvers is typically within plus or minus 20° of thecenterline of the CPC. 20° was chosen as a compromise between thecompeting factors of the angular range of exiting light and the cut-offangle. The CPC surfaces are tilted upwards by 20° to prevent them fromallowing downward traveling rays which may cause glare when exposed todirect sun. Consequently, the output range for the louvers in thisembodiment is between 0 and 40° above horizontal, regardless of theincoming direction of the light.

Ray Paths Through the Louvers

FIGS. 14 a-14 j show how incoming rays at different positions andelevation angles are redirected by the louvers 22. In particular, thefigures indicate ray tracing through louvers for the following varyingelevation angles: 0° (a), 10° (b), 20° (c), 30° (d), 40° (e), 50° (f),60° (g), 70° (h), 80° (i), and superposition of all angles (j). Lighttravels from left to right in the images. Notice that of all the raypaths traced in the images, none exits the louver channel 26 at an angleless than 0° above horizontal. The images also illustrate how somelow-angle incoming light is rejected by the louver inlet and bouncesback outside.

A natural question that arises is: what happens to rays that are out ofplane, rather than in plane, with the louvers' cross-section? On thismatter, Winston et al. explain that

-   -   the ray tracing in any 2D trough-like reflector is simple even        for rays not in a plane perpendicular to the length of the        trough. This is because the normal to the surface has no        component parallel to the length of the trough, and thus the law        of reflection can be applied in two dimensions only. The ray        direction cosine in the third dimension is constant. Thus, if [a        diagram] shows a 2D CPC with the length of the trough        perpendicular to the plane of the diagram, all rays can be        traced using only their projections on this plane (pages 53-54).        Based on this understanding, if the 2D ray path diagrams show        that for any incoming ray direction no rays are directed        downwards at the outlet, the same will be true for any incoming        ray direction in 3D as well.

The series of coordinates that define the shape of a particularembodiment of the louver 22 are as follows. Since the shape of thelouver 22 is quite complicated, the simplest way to define it is by aseries of coordinates along its surface. Using a CAD program, a splinecurve can be drawn connecting the points and accurately reproducing theshape. FIG. 15 defines the coordinate system used and Table 1 lists thecoordinates.

TABLE 1 Louver Profile Coordinates Point # X Y 1 0.0000 0.0000 2 0.0122−0.0126 3 0.0244 −0.0249 4 0.0366 −0.0368 5 0.0468 −0.0485 6 0.0610−0.0599 7 0.0732 −0.0710 8 0.0654 −0.0816 9 0.0976 −0.0923 10 0.1098−0.1025 11 0.1220 −0.1124 12 0.1341 −0.1220 13 0.1463 −0.1313 14 0.1585−0.1403 15 0.1707 −0.1490 16 0.1829 −0.1574 17 0.1951 −0.1655 18 0.2073−0.1734 19 0.2195 −0.1809 20 0.2317 −0.1880 21 0.2439 −0.1950 22 0.2561−0.2016 23 0.2683 −0.2709 24 0.2805 −0.2140 25 0.2927 −0.2197 26 0.3049−0.2251 27 0.3171 −0.2302 28 0.3293 −0.2351 29 0.3415 −0.2396 30 0.3537−0.2439 31 0.3659 −0.2479 32 0.3780 −0.2515 33 0.3902 −0.2549 34 0.4024−0.2579 35 0.4146 −0.2607 36 0.4268 −0.2631 37 0.4390 −0.2653 38 0.4512−0.2671 39 0.4634 −0.2687 40 0.4756 −0.2700 41 0.4878 −0.2710 42 0.5000−0.2716 43 0.5122 −0.2720 44 0.5244 −0.2721 45 0.5366 −0.2719 46 0.5486−0.2713 47 0.5610 −0.2705 48 0.5732 −0.2695 49 0.5854 −0.2680 50 0.5976−0.2663 51 0.6098 −0.2643 52 0.6098 −0.2643 53 0.6151 −0.2657 54 0.6205−0.2671 55 0.6262 −0.2685 56 0.6319 −0.2696 57 0.6377 −0.2712 58 0.6437−0.2725 59 0.6498 −0.2737 60 0.6561 −0.2750 61 0.6624 −0.2762 62 0.6690−0.2774 63 0.6757 −0.2785 64 0.6825 −0.2796 65 0.6895 −0.2807 66 0.6967−0.2818 67 0.7041 −0.2827 68 0.7116 −0.2837 69 0.7194 −0.2846 70 0.7274−0.2855 71 0.7355 −0.2863 72 0.7440 −0.2871 73 0.7526 −0.2878 74 0.7614−0.2885 75 0.7705 −0.2891 76 0.7799 −0.2896 77 0.7895 −0.2901 78 0.7995−0.2905 79 0.8097 −0.2908 80 0.8202 −0.2910 81 0.8310 −0.2911 82 0.8423−0.2912 83 0.8538 −0.2912 84 0.8657 −0.2910 85 0.8780 −0.2907 86 0.8907−0.2904 87 0.9039 −0.2898 88 0.9175 −0.2891 89 0.9315 −0.2884 90 0.9461−0.2874 91 0.9612 −0.2862 92 0.9768 −0.2850 93 0.9930 −0.2835 94 1.0099−0.2818 95 1.0274 −0.2799 96 1.0456 −0.2777 97 1.0645 −0.2753 98 1.0842−0.2726 99 1.1047 −0.2696 100 1.1261 −0.2664 101 1.1484 −0.2627 1021.1716 −0.2587 103 1.1960 −0.2543 104 1.2214 −0.2495 105 1.2479 −0.2442106 1.2759 −0.2384 107 1.3051 −0.2321 108 1.3357 −0.2251 109 1.3680−0.2176 110 1.4018 −0.2093 111 1.4376 −0.2002 112 1.4752 −0.1903 1131.5148 −0.1795 114 1.5568 −0.1676 115 1.6011 −0.1547 116 1.6482 −0.1405117 1.6980 −0.1251 118 1.7510 −0.1081 119 1.8073 −0.0895 120 1.6674−0.0691 121 1.9315 −0.0468 122 2.0000 −0.0222 123 1.7423 −0.1251 1241.6740 −0.1502 125 1.6105 −0.1743 126 1.5513 −0.1973 127 1.4962 −0.2193128 1.4448 −0.2402 129 1.3966 −0.2604 130 1.3515 −0.2799 131 1.3093−0.2985 132 1.2695 −0.3163 133 1.2321 −0.3335 134 1.1970 −0.3502 1351.1636 −0.3662 136 1.1325 −0.3816 137 1.1029 −0.3965 138 1.0749 −0.4109139 1.0485 −0.4248 140 1.0234 −0.4383 141 0.9997 −0.4513 142 0.9771−0.4640 143 0.9556 −0.4763 144 0.9352 −0.4882 145 0.9159 −0.4997 1460.6974 −0.5109 147 0.8797 −0.5216 148 0.8629 −0.5324 149 0.8469 −0.5427150 0.8315 −0.5527 151 0.8170 −0.5626 152 0.8029 −0.5721 153 0.7895−0.5813 154 0.7767 −0.5904 155 0.7645 −0.5993 156 0.7526 −0.6079 1570.7414 −0.6263 158 0.7305 −0.6246 159 0.7201 −0.6326 160 0.7101 −0.6405161 0.7005 −0.6482 162 0.6913 −0.6557 163 0.6824 −0.6631 164 0.6739−0.6704 165 0.6657 −0.6774 166 0.6578 −0.6844 167 0.6501 −0.6912 1680.6427 −0.6979 169 0.6357 −0.7045 170 0.6288 −0.7108 171 0.6223 −0.7171172 0.6159 −0.7233 173 0.6098 −0.7295 174 0.6038 −0.7354 175 0.5981−0.7413 176 0.5926 −0.7471 177 0.5873 −0.7527 178 0.5820 −0.7584 1790.5770 −0.7639 180 0.5271 −0.7693 181 0.5675 −0.7746 182 0.5630 −0.7799183 0.5585 −0.7851 184 0.5543 −0.7902 185 0.5502 −0.7952 186 0.5462−0.8002 187 0.5424 −0.8051 188 0.5387 −0.6099 189 0.5350 −0.8146 1900.5315 −0.8194 191 0.5281 −0.8240 192 0.5246 −0.8286 193 0.5216 −0.8331194 0.0000 0.0000

The core of the daylighting system 10 is an array of reflective louvers22 that redirect incoming light in a controlled manner deep into thespace. FIG. 16 shows the relative positions of two louvers 22 in astack. As depicted, the louvers 22 have a width w, a height h, and aspacing s. In certain embodiments, the width w is between about 1.0 inchand about 4 inches, the height h is between about 0.5 inches and about2.0 inches, and the spacing s is between about 0.5 inches and about 2.0inches. For example, in one embodiment, the width w is 2.016 inches, theheight h is 0.880 inches, and the spacing s is 0.870 inches. In oneembodiment, the louvers 22 have a constant cross-section (i.e., profile28) in the direction normal to the page.

For reference, when the width w is 2.016 inches (5.12 cm), the height his 0.880 inches (2.23 cm), and the spacing s is 0.870 inches (2.21 cm),a stack of about 27 louvers 22 is required to fill 0.6 m of facadeheight. The absolute size of the louver cross-section may be increasedor decreased, but the ratio of the dimensions preferably remains thesame for the device to function properly.

Designing a Louver Shape

Referring to FIGS. 17 a-23 and Winston et al., pages 50-57, a suitablelouver shape may be designed as follows.

As discussed herein, θ_(max) is the maximum output angle, and is themaximum angle between the compound parabolic concentrator axis(centerline of CPC) and any exiting ray. Angle φ is used to calculatethe coordinates of the upper and lower profiles of the CPC profile.Angle φ ranges from 2×θ_(max) to 90°+θ_(max); the angle φ is measuredfrom the center axis of a parabola of the CPC profile (corresponding toeither the upper or the lower profile); the center axis of the paraboladefines an angle θ_(max) with the CPC centerline axis. See FIG. 17 a.

Additional relevant parameters are:

a′=half width of inlet aperture 30

a=half width of exit aperture 31

I=length of profile along centerline axis of CPC

f=focal length of parabola, which is a function of a′ and θ_(max)

If any two of a, a′, I, and θ_(max) are chosen, the other parameters canbe calculated.

For example, if θ_(max) and a are assigned specific values, then a′ andI can be calculated as follows using the equations disclosed by Winston:

$\begin{matrix}{a^{\prime}\mspace{14mu}{can}\mspace{14mu}{be}\mspace{14mu}{calculated}\mspace{14mu}{from}\mspace{14mu} a\mspace{14mu}{and}\mspace{14mu}\theta_{\max}} & {{Equation}\mspace{14mu} 4.3} \\{{{{calculate}\mspace{14mu} I\;{from}\mspace{14mu} a},a^{\prime},{{and}\mspace{14mu}\theta_{\max}}}{a = {{\frac{a^{\prime}}{\sin\;\theta_{\max}}a^{\prime}} = {a*\sin\;\theta_{\max}}}}{l = \frac{{a^{\prime}\left( {1 + {\sin\;\theta_{\max}}} \right)}\cos\;\theta_{\max}}{\sin^{2}\theta_{\max}}}} & {{Equation}\mspace{14mu} 4.4}\end{matrix}$

Referring to FIGS. 17 a and 17 b, following the equations given inWinston et al., create a CPC profile 33, having a lower profile 34 orlower compound parabolic concentrator profile that is equal to thenegative of an upper profile 36 or upper compound parabolic concentratorprofile. Each of the lower and upper profiles 34, 36 include a portionof a parabola. The CPC profile 33 has an inlet aperture 30, i.e., asmall aperture, with a half-width of a′, and an exit aperture 31, i.e.,a large aperture, with a half-width of a, the large aperture beingdisposed downstream of the small aperture. The x and y coordinates ofthe parabolas forming the upper and lower profiles may be calculated bythe three equations listed below, with φ ranging as indicated above.

$x = \frac{2*f*{\sin\left( {\varphi - \theta_{\max}} \right)}}{1 - {\cos\;\varphi}}$$y = \frac{2*f*{\cos\left( {\varphi - \theta_{\max}} \right)}}{1 - {\cos\;\varphi}}$

Where, f=a′*(1+sin θ_(max)).

Referring to FIG. 18, rotate the CPC profile 33 counterclockwise (forCPC orientation shown in picture) by a maximum output angle θ_(max).

Referring to FIG. 19 and also to FIG. 12, add a parabola (surface A)with a vertical axis of symmetry using the left end (point E) (upstreamend) of the upper CPC profile 36 as the focus and the left end of thelower CPC profile 34 (point G) (upstream end) as a point on theparabola. The vertex (point F) of the parabola is directly below point E(focus of parabola). The shape of the parabola is now defined and thestopping point for the parabola is determined in a subsequent step.

Referring to FIG. 20, move the upper CPC profile 36 vertically downwardsfar enough below the lower CPC 34 profile so that there is a small gap gbetween the trailing or downstream edges (right ends) of the two CPCprofiles 34, 36. The small gap g is preferable because if the two CPCprofiles 34, 36 touch, then the resulting trailing edge is infinitelythin. The exact size of gap g depends on manufacturing capabilities. Inan embodiment, the small gap g may be, for example, 3 millimeters.

Referring to FIG. 21, add a line (i.e., the trailing connecting line)connecting the right ends (downstream ends) of the upper and lower CPCprofiles 34, 36 to define the trailing edge (point I). The thickness ofthe trailing edge is determined as a function of manufacturingcapabilities. The upper and lower CPC profiles 34, 36 may beapproximately parallel to each other or may define a sharp point.

Referring to FIG. 22, add a line starting at the left end (i.e.,upstream end) of the CPC profile 33 that is now lower (point E) andconnect it to the parabola (surface A) to define surface B. The closerthis line is to 45° from horizontal the better, but the point where theline intersects the parabola may be freely chosen. This completes thelouver outline or CPC profile 33.

Referring to FIG. 23, to determine the positions of first and secondlouvers 22 with respect to one another, copy and move the completedlouver outline vertically upwards or downwards by the same amount as theupper CPC profile 36 was moved, as discussed with respect to FIG. 20.For example, the distance between the respective leading edges of afirst and second louver 22 may be 0.870 inches for two louvers 22 havinga length of about 2 inches each (see FIG. 16).

Refractive Element

The louvers 22 change the elevation of the incoming light but they havelittle affect on the light's azimuth angle. Without the inclusion of arefractive element, such as refractive rods 24, under direct sun, thereflective ceiling typically exhibits a bright streak located on a linebetween the occupant's eyes and the sun. During mock-up testing(discussed below) a maximum brightness of about 350,000 candelas/m² (or0.02% of the luminance of the sun at mid-day) was observed on theceiling when using the louvers 22 without the refractive rods 24. Whilenot debilitating if not at the center of the field of vision, this levelof luminance may be too high for an office environment.

To mitigate glare concerns, a horizontal array of optically clear rods,made of a material with an index of refraction greater than 1, such aseither acrylic or glass, placed at the outlet of the louvers 22 has theeffect of spreading the incoming light in the azimuth direction, withoutaffecting the light's elevation angle. Under direct sunlight conditions,the bright streak on the ceiling is replaced with a much larger area oflower brightness. Diffusing direct sunlight in this way helps preventglare from being an issue. The total amount of light in the room may bemodestly reduced by the addition of the rods, but the glare protectionthey provide may justify their inclusion.

A preferred material for the rods may be acrylic because it does notyellow from exposure to direct sunlight. It is also less brittle thanglass and has a relatively low density. Acrylic is used in applicationssuch as airplane windows, where the material is exposed to sunlight forextended periods of time.

The main advantage of using refractive rods 24 instead of other lightdiffusing technologies is that the rods spread light out in the azimuthdirection, without impacting the light's elevation angle. This isimportant because the light exiting the louvers has been collimated inthe elevation direction. Other technologies, such as translucent glass,may diffuse light in all directions and have a lower overalltransmittance than the clear rods. In some preferred embodiments, therefractive rods 24 or cylinders are made into a structurally sound innerglazing that prevents air infiltration; the design thereby reduces thetransmission losses associated with the inner pane of glass. FIGS. 24a-24 b provide an illustration of how the refractive rods 24 affectlight passing through them, with ray tracing through rods shown for twodifferent azimuth angles (0° and 45°, respectively).

The images of FIGS. 24 a-24 b show how light passing through therefractive rods 24 is spread out horizontally. The images show a topview looking down the length of the refractive rods 24. The light raystraced have a 0° elevation angle.

The diameter of the refractive rods 24 may be chosen based on projectconstraints. Thinner refractive rods 24 are typically preferred becausethey tend to weigh less and allow the window unit to be thinner.However, they are preferably not so thin that breakage is an issueduring assembly and installation. A cost-effective solution requiresbalancing the typically lower cost of thinner rods in comparison tothicker ones, with the fact that the use of thinner rods may requirethat more total feet of rod be used to cover the same length of facade13. A preferred rod diameter for many applications may be about 10 mm.

Other refractive elements may be used with embodiments of thedaylighting system 10 of the invention, such as rods of non-circularcross-section. Also the refractive element(s) may be incorporated intothe inner or outer glazing 18, 20 by varying the surface normaldirection of one or both of the glazing's surfaces.

Reflective Ceiling

The final element of the daylighting system 10 is the reflective ceiling14 or reflective panels on the ceiling. The purpose of the reflectiveceiling is to redirect light emitted by the window unit deeper into thespace. To limit glare and distracting mirrored reflections on theceiling, the reflective surface may have a rough texture, which helps toscatter the light without totally eliminating its directionality. Aminimum reflectance of the ceiling is preferably at least 50% luminousreflectivity, more preferably at least 80% luminous reflectivity, andmost preferably at least 90% luminous reflectivity.

Rationale for Use

The greater the distance between a given louver 22 and the ceiling, thedeeper light from that louver 22 may be able to penetrate into the room.For most office buildings the ceiling height is limited by the need tomaximize rentable space. Therefore, the top louver 22 may be preferablylocated directly underneath the ceiling, and the bottom of the louver 22is then typically approximately 0.6 m below the ceiling. If the surfaceof the ceiling had a typical matte or diffuse finish, then most of thelight may hit the ceiling near the front of the room and be scatteredonto the workplane immediately below. With a diffuse surface, the lighttends to be scattered in all directions evenly so only a small portionmay be reflected off the ceiling deeply into the space. In fact, half ofthe light hitting the ceiling bounces off heading back towards thefacade 13. A low diffuse ceiling wastes much of the benefit of thelouvers 22, because the ceiling cannot take advantage of the fact thatthe light impinges on it at a shallow angle.

Since increasing the distance from the louvers 22 to the ceilinggenerally is not an option, another solution to push light deeper isprovided. Using a ceiling with a specular, rather than a diffusesurface, makes the overall system more effective. Light hitting theceiling at a shallow angle bounces off at a shallow angle. This meansthat all the light may be directed deeper into the space at a favorableangle, rather than being diffusely scattered.

Surface Roughness

A concern with using a specularly reflective ceiling is that thereflection off the ceiling may be too bright when the louvers 22 areexposed to direct sun. If the ceiling is a purely specular mirror-likesurface it may defeat the purpose of tilting the CPC section of thelouver 22 upwards to protect occupants from glare, as the ceiling may bealmost as bright as the louvers 22 themselves. The refractive rods 24 goa long way to mitigating this problem, but to further diffuse theincoming light, the design described herein incorporates a reflectiveceiling with a rough texture. The effect of the bumps on the surface isto spread the light hitting off the ceiling, without totally eliminatingthe directionality of the light. By spreading the light, the peakbrightness of the ceiling is lowered significantly. A secondary, thoughpractical, benefit of making the surface of the ceiling rough is thatpotentially distracting mirror images on the ceiling will not bediscernible to the office's occupants.

Depth Of Reflective Ceiling

The distance the reflective surface extends inwards from the facade ispreferably to be 6 m for a 12+m deep space. However, the length of thereflective ceiling may be shortened to 4 m without a major impact on theoverall performance. The effect of shortening the ceiling reflector isto reduce illumination at the back of the daylit space, but it has anegligible impact on the illumination in the front two-thirds of thespace. FIG. 25 is a graph of workplane illuminance for differentreflective ceiling lengths, showing how the pattern of illuminance isaffected by varying the length of the reflective ceiling (note that thesystem embodiment associated with FIG. 25 does not include therefractive rods).

Although the magnitude of the illuminances is different for the sunnyand overcast cases, the relative pattern of the plots remains the same.Incorporating a reflective ceiling of 2 m or more shifts the peakilluminance deeper into the room by about 3 m, from 0.5 m from thefacade to about 3.5 m. Peak illuminance is generally lowered as thelength of the reflective ceiling is increased from 0 to 4 m, but afterthat it remains largely unchanged. Limiting the maximum illuminance isan important goal, given that the level of illumination is relativelyhigh under direct sun, so the reflective ceiling is preferably not lessthan 4 m long. Past 4 m, the main effect of the reflective ceiling is toincrease the light levels near the back of the daylit zone. However,each additional unit of length provides diminishing returns, andextending the reflective ceiling past 6 m may not be practical. The restof the ceiling beyond the end of the reflective section may use thestandard acoustical tile layout.

Surface Properties of System

The surfaces of the louver 22 are preferably highly reflective toincrease the overall transmittance of the daylighting system 10. Twopossible fabrication processes include a) making the louver 22 out of ametal such as aluminum by, e.g., extrusion or die casting and finelypolish its outer surfaces, or b) injection molding the louver 22 from apolymer, e.g., plastic. To create the reflective surface, a depositionprocess, such as metallization by vacuum deposition, may be used to coatthe louver 22 with a reflective material, possibly aluminum or silver.In some embodiments, the louver 22 may be coated with a reflective film,such as a sheet of MYLAR or Daylighting Film DF2000MA available from 3M.Preferably, the reflectance of the finished louver surface is at least50% luminous reflectivity, more preferably 92% luminous reflectivity,even more preferably greater than 95%, and most preferably greater than98%. The thickness of a louver 22 coating may be taken intoconsideration during the design of the louver 22, such that thedimensions of a louver substrate in combination with the coating matchthe dimensions of the designed profile.

The importance of a high reflectance value is amplified by the fact thatmost of the light rays bounce off the louvers 22 multiple times on theirway through the louver channel 26. Table 2 shows the effects oneffective reflectance for different surface reflectances for light thatbounces off the louvers three times. A seemingly small increase, ordecrease, in reflectance can have a large effect on the total percentageof incident light transmitted through the system.

TABLE 2 Effective Reflectance for Multiple Bounces Material ReflectanceEffective Reflectance for (fraction) Three Bounces (fraction) 0.8000.512 0.880 0.681 0.920 0.779 0.950 0.857 0.980 0.941The ceiling material may be a highly reflective material with a somewhatbumpy surface. The bumpy surface circumvents having a mirrored ceiling,which may be distracting to room occupants. The bumps also help even thereflected illumination. A suitable material may be, e.g., the MIROStucco G product made by Alanod. Although the reflectance of the ceilingmaterial is preferably as high as possible, the reflectance is lesscritical for this surface than for the surface of the louvers 22. Thisis because light will only bounce off the ceiling once, rather thanmultiple times.

EXAMPLES Case Study

A quantitative example of how the system performs is as follows. FIGS.26 a-26 d shows the results of a particular case study building spacewith the full daylighting system versus an unshaded window for fourdifferent representative sky conditions. FIGS. 26 a, 26 b, and 26 cshows the workplace illuminance of embodiments of the invention and basecases for sunny conditions, while FIG. 26 d shows the workplaceilluminance of embodiments of the invention and base cases for overcastconditions. The lighting simulation program Radiance was used to run thesimulations.

The reference case chosen was a room 37 m in width, 15 m in depth, and2.8 m in height. The facade was south-facing and had a 15° skyobstruction. This case was chosen because it has a favorable room sizeand orientation for the system, while still including some skyobstructions.

The following conditions apply:

-   -   Simulations use Tokyo weather data obtained from the Energy Plus        Tokyo weather file.    -   All times are in local legal time, not solar time.    -   Illuminance values are reported on a workplane 0.75 m from the        floor along the centerline of the room.    -   Simulations combine the results of the upper clerestory windows        and lower view windows so that the lighting contribution from        the partially closed blinds in the lower window is included.

The facade below 2.09 m from the floor is unchanged for all cases: theblinds are closed at a 65° angle to keep out all direct sun but stillallow through some diffuse daylight. The system case fills the top 0.71m of the facade with the daylighting window unit (including the frame),whereas the unshaded base case leaves the top 0.71 m of the glazedfacade uncovered. The other facades are fully opaque for all cases.FIGS. 26 a-26 d provide workplane illuminance for selected time stepsalong the centerline of the room for the system and base cases. Dashedlines demarking 300, 500, and 700 lux are included as they are commonminimum illuminance requirements for office spaces. The conditions atwhich centerline workplane Illuminance was determined are as follows:

-   -   FIG. 26 a: Sunny, Spring/Fall, 11:30 am (Base Case Peak: 20,638        Lux);    -   FIG. 26 b: Sunny, Summer, 11:30 am (Base Case Peak: 3665 lux);    -   FIG. 26 c: Sunny, Winter, 11:30 am (Base Case Peak: 19,009 Lux);        and    -   FIG. 26 d: Overcast, 20,000 Lux Global Horizontal Illuminance.

Under sunny conditions, the louver system outperforms the respectivebase case throughout the year. Light levels at the back of the room are400 to 1000% higher when using the louver system, compared to the basecase. Also, the louver system avoids the extremely high peak illuminanceseen in the base case resulting from direct sunlight transmission.

Under totally overcast conditions, the overall illuminance levels forall systems are much lower. It is common for passive daylighting systemsto perform significantly worse than an uncovered window under cloudyconditions because of the light absorbed by the daylighting systemsitself. The louver system still outperforms the uncovered window atdistances greater than 5 m from the facade, although the absolute lightlevels are modest. For cases where there is significant sky obstructionnear the horizon due to the building's surroundings, the louver systemperforms even better relative to the uncovered window case. This isbecause the uncovered window relies on light from near the horizon toilluminate the deep parts of the space, unlike the louver system. Forthe open window case to be a viable option it may require some type ofdynamic shading system to shield the office space from direct sunlight,a drawback from which the louver system does not suffer.

As one may expect, the system provides significantly more light whendirect sun is present. As a result, the system performs best when it hasgood exposure to the south (or the north in the southern hemisphere).

Initial Physical Mock-Up

The design has been reduced to practice through a mock-up that includesall three light directing elements (louvers, rods, and ceiling). Aphysical prototype of the system was built to test for glare problems aswell as to obtain a qualitative understanding of what the system maylook like. To produce the louver prototype, a 3D version of the louverwas modeled in the Computer Aided Design (CAD) program Pro/EngineerWildfire 2.0. The edges of the individual louvers were designed so thatthey may stack together with the proper spacing. The parts were thenexported as STL files that may be read by a 3D printer made byDimension. The 3D printer is able to build complex shapes by depositingone layer of molten ABS plastic at a time, much the same way a paperprinter creates a page of text by marking one line at a time.

Once the louvers were complete, the surfaces were covered by a thinsheet of reflective material. Strips of the reflective film were cut tosize and attached to the plastic louver using double-sided tape. Thefilm conformed to the profile of the plastic, resulting in a louver withthe correct shape and surface reflectance. The individual louvers werethen assembled into a single unit, seven channels tall. The louverassembly was enclosed in a glazing unit with clear glass on either side.

Because of the dimensional limitations of the 3D printer, as well asassembly time and cost considerations, the louver assembly prototypebuilt was a small subset of the real size of the louver assembly. Thelouver's cross section was built to scale (2″ or 0.051 m wide), butlength and total number of louvers was reduced. The dimensions of thecompleted unit were 0.271 m wide and 0.147 m tall, not including theframe.

The refractive rods are stock parts available from McMaster-Carr and avariety of other suppliers. The rods were cut to length and then theirtops and bottoms were glued to strips of wood.

To create the reflective ceiling, sheets of rough reflective material(Cinegel #3803: Roscoflex S) were glued to the underside of a largeboard measuring 2′×6′ (0.61×1.83 m). Legs 5′6″ (1.68 m) tall wereattached to the corners of the board to provide a proper amount ofvertical clearance to the ground. A high strength VELCRO hook and loopfastening strip was added to the underside of the board as well as thetop of the glazing unit so that the glazing unit and rod assembly may beeasily attached and removed from the ceiling assembly.

In the physical mock-up described herein, the material used for theceiling was made by a lighting effects company named Rosco. The name ofthe product used is “Cinegel #3803: Roscoflex S”. The material is avinyl backed foil, and therefore it is not a suitable material formaking ceiling panels. Rosco does not measure the reflectance of thismaterial, so although it appears to be highly reflective, the actualreflectance value is unknown.

The completed mock-up was assembled and tested on an open area.

Tokyo Mock-Up

In order to validate the Radiance simulation results, as well as testfor glare problems more explicitly, a more sophisticated full-scalemock-up of the daylighting system was subsequently erected in a Tokyooffice building.

After the profile of the louver was finalized, CAD drawings were sentout for fabrication. The louvers were produced through an aluminumextrusion process. Aluminum alloy 6063-T5, a common material forextrusion, was used.

Although aluminum was chosen for this prototype, a polymer may be usedinstead. Aluminum was selected to maintain flexibility in the method bywhich the surface may be made reflective. The outer surfaces of thelouvers may be made reflective by a) fine polishing, b) metal vapordeposition, or c) applying an adhesive-backed reflective film. Choosingplastic as the substrate material may have eliminated fine polishing asan option. Ultimately, the adhesive-backed reflective film was chosenfor the mock-up and after the louvers were produced, they weremachine-wrapped with an adhesive-backed reflective film. The louverswere then assembled into an array by affixing them to endplates.Through-holes were drilled into the endplates at the correct locationsand screws were inserted into tapped holes in the louvers.

Production of the acrylic rod assemblies was considerably simpler thanof the louvers. The rods were commercially available, so a quantity of10 mm diameter acrylic rods was purchased and cut to the proper length.Sets of rods were then combined into 0.6 m wide assemblies by gluingtheir top and bottom ends to common endplates.

The louver and rod assemblies were then installed into a framestructure, which also included a pane of glass on the room side of theframe. An exterior-side glazing was unnecessary because the mock-up wasto be installed behind the existing single pane window in the testoffice. The dimensions of each completed daylighting window module,including its frame, were 1.8 m (width)×0.71 m (height)×0.085 m (depth).Thirty individual louvers with a vertical spacing of 22.1 mm were usedto fill the height of each module.

The reflective ceiling material was also commercially available. Theparticular material used for this mock-up was the anodized version ofAlanod's Miro Stucco G aluminum sheet. This material has the highreflectance and specularity and rough texture called for by the system'sdesign. Sheets of the material were temporarily affixed to the existingacoustical tile ceiling.

While the invention has been particularly shown and described withreference to specific preferred embodiments, it should be understood bythose skilled in the art that various changes in form and detail may bemade therein without departing from the spirit and scope of theinvention as defined by the appended claims.

What is claimed is:
 1. A louver for a daylighting system comprising: aleading edge defined by an intersection of: a parabolic concentratorsurface, and a flat surface; and a trailing edge defined by anintersection of: a lower compound parabolic concentrator profile, and anupper compound parabolic concentrator profile.
 2. The louver of claim 1,wherein the leading edge is further defined by a leading connectingsurface disposed between the parabolic concentrator surface and the flatsurface.
 3. The louver of claim 1, wherein the trailing edge is furtherdefined by a trailing connecting surface disposed between the lowercompound parabolic concentrator profile and the upper compound parabolicconcentrator profile.
 4. The louver of claim 1, wherein the parabolicconcentrator surface, flat surface, lower compound parabolicconcentrator profile, and upper compound parabolic concentrator profiledefine an asymmetric profile.
 5. The louver of claim 4, wherein theasymmetric profile comprises a generally triangular profile.
 6. Thelouver of claim 5, further comprising an apex disposed between theleading edge and the trailing edge.
 7. The louver of claim 6, whereinthe apex is disposed in a downward direction from the leading andtrailing edges.
 8. The louver of claim 6, wherein an upper surfaceformed between the leading edge and the trailing edge comprises adiscontinuous contour.
 9. The louver of claim 8, wherein thediscontinuous contour comprises a pair of arcuate surfaces meeting at aboundary line.
 10. The louver of claim 6, wherein an inlet surfaceformed between the leading edge and the apex comprises the flat surface.11. The louver of claim 6, wherein an outlet surface formed between theapex and the trailing edge comprises the lower compound parabolicconcentrator profile.
 12. The louver of claim 1, wherein at least one ofthe parabolic concentrator surface, flat surface, lower compoundparabolic concentrator profile, and upper compound parabolicconcentrator profile comprises a reflective surface.
 13. The louver ofclaim 12, wherein the reflective surface is at least partially specular.14. The louver of claim 12, wherein the reflective surface is formed byat least one of a deposition process, a reflective film coating, or apolishing step.
 15. The louver of claim 1, wherein a profile defined bythe parabolic concentrator surface, flat surface, lower compoundparabolic concentrator profile, and upper compound parabolicconcentrator profile is defined by at least one of extrusion andmolding.
 16. The louver of claim 1, wherein an angle of the flat surfacewith respect to horizontal is about 45°.
 17. A louver for a daylightingsystem comprising, a leading edge defined by an intersection of: aparabolic concentrator surface, and a flat surface; a trailing edgedefined by an intersection of: a lower compound parabolic concentratorprofile, and an upper compound parabolic concentrator profile; and anapex disposed between the leading edge and the trailing edge, in adownward direction from the leading and trailing edges, wherein (i) theparabolic concentrator surface, flat surface, lower compound parabolicconcentrator profile, and upper compound parabolic concentrator profiledefine an asymmetric profile comprising a generally triangular profileand (ii) a height measured between the leading edge and the apex isselected from a range of about 0.5 inches to about 2.0 inches.
 18. Alouver for a daylighting system comprising: a leading edge defined by anintersection of: a parabolic concentrator surface, and a flat surface;and a trailing edge defined by an intersection of: a lower compoundparabolic concentrator profile, and an upper compound parabolicconcentrator profile wherein at least one of the parabolic concentratorsurface, flat surface, lower compound parabolic concentrator profile,and upper compound parabolic concentrator profile comprises a reflectivesurface, and a minimum reflectance of the reflective surface is selectedfrom the group consisting of 50% reflectance, 92% reflectance, 95%reflectance, and 98% reflectance.
 19. A louver for a daylighting systemcomprising: a leading edge defined by an intersection of: a parabolicconcentrator surface, and a flat surface; and a trailing edge defined byan intersection of: a lower compound parabolic concentrator profile, andan upper compound parabolic concentrator profile, wherein a widthbetween the leading edge and the trailing edge is selected form a rangeof about 1.0 inches and about 4.0 inches.